CC BY
37
ка шаманского бубна"; доклам-да-дай - "действовать сачком", то есть "ловить сачком", от основы слова докламда - "сачок для ловли бабочек"; ицэт-дэ-дэй -"действовать стрелой из лука", то есть "выпускать стрелы из лука", от основы слова ицэт - "стрела лука"; мавут-да-дай - "действовать арканом", то есть "ловить арканом", от основы слова мавут - "аркан для ловли оленей"; нинками-да-дай -"действовать посохом", то есть "отталкиваться посохом", от основы слова нинками - "мужской посох"; хиливун-дэ-дэй - "действовать прутьями", то есть "насаживать на прутья", от основы слова хиливун - "прутья для насадки рыбы с целью копченья"; чорами-да-дай - "действовать тростью", то есть "ходить, опираясь на трость", "на посох", от основы слова чорами "трость", "посох" и т.д.
Суффиксы -р, -ра/-рэ и -ла/-лэ присоединяются к именным основам и дают значение пользования данным предметом при совершении действия, например, гид-ла-дай - "колоть копьем", от основы слова гид - "копье"; аир-да-дай - "колоть гарпуном", от основы слова аир - "гарпун носок (на морского зверя"; мулэцкы-дэ-дэй - "рубить топором", от основы слова мулэцкы - "топор для рубки мяса"; эрун-дэ-дэй - "разгребать лопатой", от основы слова эрун - "лопата деревянная для разгребания снега"; тибак-да-дай - "выдалбливать теслом", от основы слова тибак - "тесло (вогнутый инструмент с острым железным концом, посаженным на деревянную рукоятку, для выдалбливания лодок, корыт)"; нюли-вун-да-дай - "снимать скребком", от основы слова нюливун - "скребок для снятия шерсти со шкуры" и т.д.
Библиографический список
Образованная при помощи суффиксов -лач/-лэч (-лат/-лэт), -нач/-нэч (-нат/-нэт) лексема приобретает значени, временного обладания данным предметом или пользования чем-либо в качестве чего-нибудь, например: дувуцка-лат-тай - "иметь лом", от основы слова дувуцка - "инструмент для дробления льда (лом)"; пэктэрэв-лэт-тэй - "иметь ружье", от основы слова пэктэрэвун - "ружье"; туркилаттай - "иметь сани", от основы слова турки -"сани"; хилгун-лат-тай - "иметь сверло", от основы слова хилгун - "сверло", "шило"; хилтэс-лэт-тэй - "иметь огниво", от основы слова хилтэс - "трут", "кремень", "огниво"; хиркан-лат-тай "иметь нож", от основы слова хиркан -"нож" и т.д.
Многообразие способов морфологического словообразования во многом определяет богатство номинативных возможностей эвенского языка. Исследование при помощи вышеописанных методов позволили выявить словообразовательную возможность суффиксов. Таким образом, в эвенском языке отмечается большое количество суффиксов, с помощью которых образованы орудия действия. На примерах была сделана попытка доказать, как словообразовательная структура слова воплощает в себе тот аспект языкового сознания, который отражает национально-культурную специфику эвенского народа. Основываясь на анализе языкового материала, отметим, что в эвенском языке орудия действия образуются с помощью различных словообразовательных суффиксов, однако не все они обладают одинаковой продуктивностью.
1. Левин В.И. Краткий эвенско-русский словарь. Ленинград: Учпедгиз, 1936.
2. Ришес Л.Д. Русско-эвенский словарь для эвенской начальной школы. Ленинград: Учпедгиз, 1950.
3. Роббек В.А. Языки эвенов Березовки. Ленинград: Наука, 1989.
4. Роббек В.А., Роббек М.Е. Эвенско-русский словарь. Новосибирск: Наука, 2005.
5. Дуткин Х.И. Эвенско-русский словарь. Аллаиховский говор эвенов Якутии. Санкт-Петербург: Наука, 1995.
6. Роббек В.А. Грамматические категории эвенского глагола в функционально-семантическом аспекте. Новосибирск: Наука, 2007.
7. Роббек В.А. О некоторых закономерностях сочетания суффиксов в одной глагольной основе эвенского языка. Вопросы языка и фольклора народностей Севера. Якутск, 1980: 42 - 52.
8. Болдырев Б.В. Словообразование имен существительных в тунгусо-маньчжурских языках в сравнительно-историческом освещении. Новосибирск: Наука, 1987.
9. Нестерова Е.В. Образные слова эвенского языка. Новосибирск: Наука, 2010.
10. Цинциус В.И. Очерк грамматики эвенского (ламутского) языка. Ленинград: Учпедгиз, 1947.
References
1. Levin V.I. Kratkij 'evensko-russkijslovar'. Leningrad: Uchpedgiz, 1936.
2. Rishes L.D. Russko-'evenskijslovar'dlya 'evenskojnachal'nojshkoly. Leningrad: Uchpedgiz, 1950.
3. Robbek V.A. Yazyki 'evenov Berezovki. Leningrad: Nauka, 1989.
4. Robbek V.A., Robbek M.E. 'Evensko-russkijslovar'. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2005.
5. Dutkin H.I. 'Evensko-russkij slovar'. Allaihovskijgovor 'evenov Yakutii. Sankt-Peterburg: Nauka, 1995.
6. Robbek V.A. Grammaticheskie kategorii 'evenskogo glagola v funkcional'no-semanticheskom aspekte. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2007.
7. Robbek V.A. O nekotoryh zakonomernostyah sochetaniya suffiksov v odnoj glagol'noj osnove 'evenskogo yazyka. Voprosy yazyka ifol'klora narodnostej Severa. Yakutsk, 1980: 42 - 52.
8. Boldyrev B.V. Slovoobrazovanie imen suschestvitel'nyh v tunguso-man'chzhurskih yazykah v sravnitel'no-istoricheskom osveschenii. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1987.
9. Nesterova E.V. Obraznye slova 'evenskogo yazyka. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2010.
10. Cincius V.I. Ocherkgrammatiki 'evenskogo (lamutskogo) yazyka. Leningrad: Uchpedgiz, 1947.
Статья поступила в редакцию 08.06.20
УДК 821.161.1, 910.4
Alekseev P.V., Doctor of Sciences (Philology), Head of Department of Russian Language and Literature, Gorno-Altaisk State University (Gorno-Altaisk, Russia),
E-mail: pavel.alekseev.gasu@gmail.com
Alekseeva A.A., Secretary at Center for Science and Innovation Development, Gorno-Altaisk State University (Gorno-Altaisk, Russia), E-mail: asel.grant@mail.ru
Braeckman F, student, Ghent University (Ghent, Belgium), E-mail: florence.braeckman@ugent.be
"TARTARS" AND "KALMUKS" IN PRINCE SAN DONATO'S SIBERIAN TRAVELOGUE. The article discusses descriptions of the indigenous peoples of the southern Altai found in the Siberian travelogue "After wild sheep in the Altai and Mongolia" (1900) by Elim Demidov, Prince of San Donato. The purpose of the trip was to hunt argali (Ovis ammon) as part of the European tradition of "big game hunting", in which every traveller wanted to distinguish himself. However, the attention to everyday life, culture and history of the southern Altai makes this travelogue one of the most important documents to understand the origins of the orientalist image of Altai. In the context of European Orientalism, the images of "local savages" in Demidov's descriptions are constructed on the basis of stereotypical characteristics typical of most descriptions of travel to the east: they are naive as children and cruel as savages. Thus, Altai is described as a typologically eastern space inhabited by eastern population at the lowest stage of development.
Key words: San-Donato, Elim Demidov, Altai, Orientalism, Terra Incognita, travelogue.
П.В. Алексеев, д-р филол. наук, доц., зав. каф. русского языка и литературы Горно-Алтайского государственного университета,
г. Горно-Алтайск, E-mail: pavel.alekseev.gasu@gmail.com
А.А. Алексеева, секр., Центр науки и инноваций Горно-Алтайского государственного университета, г. Горно-Алтайск, E-mail: asel.grant@mail.ru
Ф. Брекман, студентка, Гентский университет, г. Гент, E-mail: florence.braeckman@ugent.be
«ТАТАРЫ» И «КАЛМЫКИ» В СИБИРСКОМ ТРАВЕЛОГЕ КНЯЗЯ САН-ДОНАТО
Исследование выполнено при финансовой поддержке РФФИ и Правительства Республики Алтай в рамках научного проекта № 18-412-040004.
В статье рассматриваются описания коренных народов Южного Алтая, обнаруживаемые в сибирском травелоге Елима Демидова, князя Сан-Донато «За диким бараном на Алтай и в Монголию» (1900). Целью путешествия была охота на архара (Ovis ammon) как часть европейской традиции «big game hunting», в которой каждый путешественник хотел отличиться. Однако внимание к повседневной жизни, культуре и истории Южного Алтая делает этот тра-
велог одним из самых важных документов, позволяющих понять истоки ориенталистского образа Алтая. В контексте европейского ориентализма образы «местных дикарей» в описаниях Демидова конструируются на основе стереотипных характеристик, свойственных большинству описаний путешествий на Восток: они наивны, как дети и жестоки, как дикари. Таким образом, Алтай описывается как типологически восточное пространство, населенное восточным населением, находящимся на самой низкой ступени развития.
Ключевые слова: Сан-Донато, Елим Демидов, Алтай, ориентализм, терра инкогнита, травелог.
Great number of studies has shown that travelogues are fairly representative source to analyse the opinions of the traveller about non-European regions [1, 2]. Mostly such travelogues are written with the purpose to just objectively describe the traveling experience, the environment, the people and so one. But these travelogues can always be read in two different ways: firstly, from those who read travel writing from a fairly uncritical political position, and, secondly, from those who analyse it as part of the critical study of colonial discourse [3, p. 2]. In this paper we will partly apply the second way and try to find orientalist characteristics of indigenous people of Altai.
Elim Demidov, Prince of San Donato gives a detailed description about his traveling and about the things he sees and encounters along the way. Reading between the lines we can form the opinion of the writer and analyse whether we can detect typical orientalist point of view or not. But according to B. Colbert, «sometimes they [travel writers] engage in proto-colonialist commentary on the civilization, cultivation, or modernity of those whom they encounter; sometimes they grope towards a selfhood that acknowledges and embraces otherness and at other times they elide all questions of identity politics into an aesthetics of landscape, the 'beauty and variety of scenery' that The Times projected in 1849 as the measure of tourist desire» [4, p. 2].
To have an orientalist point of view the writer has to be a part of imperial discourse of Europe. At first this may not seem the case as our writher E. Demidov is a member of the famous Russian noble family during the imperial period. Originating in the city of Tula in the XVII century, the Demidovs found success through the mining industry, and were entered into the European nobility by Peter the Great. Their descendants became among the most influential merchants and earliest industrialists in the Russian Empire, and at their peak were predicted to be the second-richest family in Russia, behind only the Russian Imperial Family. Elim Pavlovich Demidov, a 3th prince of San Donato, was born in 1868 in Vienna being a part of remote branch of this famous family. So he may have been originated from a Russian family, but he was very much a part of the European world. And as shown further in the article Altai region to his European taste was wilder and uncivilised part of Russia. As he says already in the very beginning of the book in his opinion they were going to a wild land: «I had a few matters to settle in St. Petersburg before leaving, the most important being to secure the services of a good doctor, who would not mind roughing it, and who was accustomed to travelling in a wild country» [5, p. 3 - 4].
An idea about trip to Altai came to Demidov's mind in London. In the spring of 1897 E. Demidov was passing by a shop in Piccadilly with his wife when his eye fell on some heads of wild sheep - OvisAmmon - he saw through the window. He was struck by the size of their heads and it intrigued him so much he decided to learn more about their origin. He soon learned that these heads were from sheep's originating from the Altai Mountains. Soon after he assembled his travel company and decided to travel to the Altai region to go after the wild sheep. The main purpose was to go after the wild sheep, to go hunting and to expand his collection of wild sheep heads. But as soon as it was known that he was going to travel in that direction he was contacted by a few different scientists who were very curious about what he was going to discover there. As it is stated in his book the author received a most encouraging letter from Mr. P. Semenoff, famous orientalist, traveller, Vice-President of the Imperial Geographical Society, urging him to bring back as much information as he could on the country he was about to visit, adding that the slightest details, to whatever branch of science they might belong, would be most acceptable to the Society [5, p. 4]. This shows once again that the Altai region was still an unidentified, exotic area wherever they had little information. It remained practically unexplored and was really terra incognita.
Their real journey began in Moscow. From there they travelled by boat the Nizhny Novgorod. From here they were going to continue their journey to Tagil but first they stopped in Kasan, the great Tartar town. Here we encounter the first descriptions of local populations and we must say they are not very positive: «We witnessed a curious and lively bargaining affray between the captain of our ship and a crowd (I was going to say a herd) of squalid-looking Tartars who, wanting to be conveyed to some landing-place further on, made offers for the price of their passage. The captain was demanding one rouble 50 kopecks apiece, shouting from the top of the deck; the Tartars were willing to give only one rouble 30 kopecks. Finally, after a long and noisy dispute, the bargain was struck at one rouble 43 kopecks, and the whole throng poured in with yells and a strong smell of Russian leather boots and unwashed humanity» [5, p. 10].
Here it is remarkable how he describes the Tartars. He wanted to call them a herd implying that they looked more like animals. He says that they are squalid-looking. The bargaining progress also seems new to him and I feel that he finds this also something for less civilised people. Also worth mentioning here is that he is talking about Tartars and not about Russians. It are the first 'foreign' people that he sees on this trip and his description immediately becomes much more negative. This
is something we see often return throughout the book that he makes a very clear distinction between the Russians and the other, in his eyes, foreign populations such as the Tatars and later on the Kalmuks and the Kirghiz. Even if these populations are also inhabitants of Russia, he does not see them as real Russians and describes them as more wild and less civilised. It is not superfluous to remind that when Demidov writes "Kalmyks", he means Altaians, and when he writes "Kirghiz", he means Kazakh nomadic clans.
Before entering the Altai region, they stayed a few days in the area close to the Tagil river. It is here that he demarcates the border between the West and the East: "Europe ends and Asia begins". Here we encounter another description of wild and different the Other. He wrote: "The mining people are sometimes very savage and cruel; in one case a girl was slowly burnt to death for non-compliance with the wishes of her torturers. Other instances of this kind might be given, but it would carry me too far from my subject" [5, p. 19].
So we could say that from this point, when they cross the border between Asia and Europe his descriptions start to change. From there they continue their trip by train on the Siberian railways. The country becomes more wild and less inhabited. As he states in the article: «We found villages very scarce; Kourgan, Petnopavloosk, Omak, and Kainsk were the only large towns on route. At the stations hardly any provisions were to be got, and we had to rely entirely upon our own stores» [5, p. 23]. This is a very interesting statement that the region became wilder from the border of Europe and Asia. This proves that we can really talk about orientalism here were the east is imaged as the uncivilised other.
The last real town they stop is Barnaul. Here he is rather positive about the town and especially about their large interest in education. Something that he was clearly not expecting: «I was also struck by the active interest which the authorities at Barnaul take in the welfare and education of the common people, an interest which seemed to me to be much above the average in comparison with that of European Russia» [5, p. 33].
In his and in his companions' opinions they now really were entering a more savage world. A first example is the way he describes the ferry: «These ferry-boats were worked in the most primitive fashion by horses tied to two cross-posts» [5, p. 39]. However, at some points he is surprised about how good the villages and the inhabitants looked. He was struck by the size of the villages and by how well off the inhabitants seemed. So sometimes he gives a quit positive description of the region but he is always very surprised by it and it clearly does not fill in his expectations about the region. From this we could conclude that he was indeed expecting a wilder scenery and that he had created a certain image of the region in his head in advance based on stereotypes of the region. However, this is not literally stated in the text.
He also states that the peasants here were much more free than the peasants in central Russia: «Most of the peasants here are descendants of Russian colonists who had emigrated and acquired a certain prosperity, owing to a liberal allotment of ground such as is unknown in European Russia. Their ways and manners are entirely different from those of the peasants in Central Russia. Here one observes a stronger spirit of independence and sense of personal freedom. Labour and intelligence are the striking features» [5, p. 41 - 42].
Another reason he gives for the welfare of the country is the absence of common property which exists in most parts of European Russia, where peasants are only tenants of the land, and are shifted by decisions of the community from one bit of ground to another. And as a result of this they never care to improve ground which next year may be taken away and allotted to someone else. Here every peasant is a small proprietor, and the Government land tax is cheerfully paid. The writer, E. Demidov, clearly wasn't a fan of common property which is quite obvious concerning he was a very prosperous man. From this information we can conclude he was a wealthy observer who wasn't a fan of the socialistic ideas.
As he moves further into the Altai region towards Kosh Agach he meets the Altai inhabitants, the Kalmuks. Immediately we can spot the differences between the more civilised Russian merchants and the native Kalmuks in his descriptions. During the first encounter with the Kalmuks he states: «The Kalmuks are a very hospitable race. Their numbers, as I was told, are gradually decreasing in the Altai, where, according to statistics, only six or seven thousand remain. They are at a very low ebb of civilisation, and worship spirits. Like Mongols and Chinese, they shave their heads and wear pig- tails. They are mostly nomads and live in yourts, or felt-covered tents, with wicker frames, which they shift from place to place according to the time of year and the abundance of grass available for their cattle» [5, p. 56 - 57].
If we compare this to the descriptions he gives us from the Russian merchants who to him seem well of and live in the best houses it is very clear that the Kalmuks to him are less civilised, then the Russians living in the area. He also describes the clothes and the appearances of the Kalmuks: «The Kalmuks dress in a very peculiar manner; they wear, winter and summer, a large sheepskin coat confined round the
body by a leather strap; in summer they let the upper part of it drop, thus going about naked to the waist. Rich Kalmuks wear a soft shirt underneath» [5, p. 59].
In this description we can notice the world 'peculiar' which again indicates that the finds them different and strange. They are also described as kind of dangerous as we can read a story about 500 Kalmuks attacking a police officer because they were angry about a decree augmenting Government taxes. It is told that the police officer had to flee otherwise they would have killed him. At one point they also become a spectator of an offering ritual. Demidov is quit struck by this and it is clear that to him this a ritual performed by wildlings: «Two or three poles were put up in the middle of a field, in a slanting position from the ground; at the end of these poles hung skins of horses and goats ; the wretched animals had been torn to pieces alive as a peace offering to the spirits. After two trees are hewn down the animal is tied, his fore feet to one and hind legs to the other, and the trees are released. It was, indeed, a ghastly sight» [5, p. 71].
From Demidovs notes I can conclude that Russian authorities were not very present in this region. Sometimes the presence of a Russian officer is mentioned but very rarely. It is clear that the government had little interest of heaving complete control over this region. However, the Kalmuks were not completely free to do as they pleased. There was the Zaissan, the elected chief of a tribe who controlled them and whom they had to listen to. He is described by Demidov as «a christened native, and a great deal above the average of Kalmuk intelligence». Here he indicates again how unintelligent he found the Kalmuks.
Because there was so little control of the government the Zaissan could rule as he pleased as described in the following quotation: «the Zaissan, the elected chief of a tribe, is almost omnipotent in his district, and generally rules over his subjects in a most arbitrary fashion, Government control amounting to very little, and the inhabitants being at the lowest possible degree of civilisation, if such it may be called. We were several times witnesses of punishments inflicted on Kalmuks by the Zaissans orders for slight attempts at disobedience, and occasionally had to put a stop to them. The usual mode of punishment consists in flogging the wretched culprit in a most merciless way, till he sometimes loses consciousness. We happened to be present at a milder example of this performance on the following day, when the Zaissan found one of the Kalmuks not helping to catch the ponies for the start. He followed him on horseback some hundred yards, beating him as hard as he could with his knotted whip» [5, p. 85 - 86].
After all this they started to focus more on the hunting. They assembled four hunters who knew their way in this region to help them find the sheep. Among these four hunters was a man named Taba, who was described as by far the keenest and cleverest of them all. He was as sharp as a monkey, and kept urging them to take him to Europe, where he was afraid he would have become a dreadful scoundrel, though in his own sphere he was well enough, and at times witty and amusing [5, p. 87]. Here we could conclude that even if the local population were called smart, it was only in comparison with the other locals. When compared to Europeans they were far from smart enough and living in Europe they would just be stupid criminals. But for the life their they were good enough. So as we might sometimes get the feeling that he describes them in a positive way we must always keep in mind that for the writer, compared to Europe they will always be less developed.
Over the Russian-Mongolian border they meet Kirghiz men for the first time. In his descriptions there is a large difference between the Kirghiz and Kalmuk peoples. As stated by Demidov: «their slimness remains unrivalled among Asiatic tribes and we found them to be the cleverest race we had as yet come across» [5, p. 87]. He explains that the Kalmuks are placed lower than the Kirghiz men and that they are afraid of them. He could understand this very well because they the Kirghiz were so much smarter. He also describes their appearance in a different way than he did with the Kalmuks. From his words you can derive that he has a kind of admiration for them. «The striking feature of their costume was undoubtedly the tall, red heels of their top-boots, fully four inches long, which showed that it was more their habit to ride than to walk. They wore long, greasy frocks, lined with sheepskin, and low fur caps. Their faces bore an expression of astonishment, though their eyes betrayed cunning» [5, p. 211].
As you can read he saw the cunning in their eyes from the moment he saw them which again implies that he finds them intelligent. Another argument we find in the text is there way of bargaining. He proposes them to be their guides in the Mongolian territory but they refuse because they have other obligations. Subsequently he offers them money for their services. But because of this they get the feeling they can't go on without the Kirghiz men and that their services are indispensable. They therefor ask a lot more money than was offered. From this Demidov concludes that they are very bright and much harder to deceive then the Kalmuks. This also shows in a way why they are using the Kalmuks. Not only because of their knowledge of the
Библиографический список / References
region and the land but also because they are so easy to manipulate and in a way scared of them. From the fact that he finds the Khirgiz men smarter than the Kalmuks because of their skills in bargaining we could derive the features an intelligent population in his eyes needs to have. Because the Kirghiz are better in negotiating, deceiving, manipulating and dealing with money they are wiser. This is the typical European concept of being intelligent.
Despite the fact that the Kalmuks are very good hunters who know everything about their land and the animals they do not answer to the European demands of being qualified as being smart. This also shows orientalism in a way because what we in the west consider to qualify as smart and good is the only correct opinion. Everything that is different from how it is done in the west is automatically less good. Whether it is about their ferries, the way they dress or the fact that they live in tents. It is different from the European standards and therefore less valuable.
Alongside the Kirghiz people and the Kalmuks the travel company also encountered Chinese people. About them they also gave a few detailed descriptions. For example this part in which they describe their houses. «I went with my wife to inspect the native dwellings, and found them even dirtier than we had anticipated. A few ragged Chinamen sat smoking their long pipes round the fireplace, and the combined smoke rendered the air stifling. They all seemed very astonished at the sight of us, and made a circle round us, examining us closely, fingering our clothes, and paying special attention above all things to my wife's riding crop. We had to rely entirely on our pantomimic powers to explain the use of the different articles they were interested in. Needless to say that we shortened our visit» [5, p. 171 - 172].
It is clear that he does not think very highly of the ordinary Chinese people. He finds their homes dirty and he does not say it with that many words but calling the men ragged makes it clear that he finds the people quit dirty as well. Later on they encounter another Chinese settlement which he describes as half a dozen dirty yourts. This is again not a very respectable way to talk about people's homes. However, about the local head of the Chinese he is less denigrating. At first I thought he might even be a bit impressed. When they are trying to get permission to move forward with a native guide they kept receiving a negative answer. This bothered Demidov and he was starting to lose his patience. In the following part of the book we see how he tries to convince the Chinese to grant them permission. «We used all our diplomatic resources to obtain someone acquainted with the region, saying that we were ourselves important people in our country, and that our sovereigns would be very much annoyed if they knew that we had not been treated according to our position, etc. - but all in vain.
The constant reply was that he had received no orders from Kobdo. Moreover, after having perused our passports, he told us that he would have to send them to the authorities of that town to be care- fully examined, and that we should be obliged to wait till they were returned, which implied three weeks stay at the karaoul. Paying no attention to this ultimatum, we solemnly got up, thanked him for his courtesy, and retired with the firm intention of starting on the following day» [5, p. 175].
He tries to use his social status to convince the leader to obey his demands. He also threatens them with the fact that their western sovereign would not be happy. This demonstrates his belief that as a western important man he would have power over them and that they would be afraid of the western sovereigns and fulfil their wishes. His believe however is demolished by the fact that they completely ignore his so called power. Subsequently Demidov on his turn ignores the Chinese ultimatum and decides to continue anyway. This shows the lack of respect they have for the local authorities and how little interested they are by their conditions. This are two examples of how Demidov places himself above the local population and how he finds that even if he is a foreigner he has more power than them even in this area.
When the hunting was no longer a large success in Mongolia they decided to start heading back to Russia and afterwards back to Europe. Their men were very happy and excited to head back as they were starting to miss their homes. For them it had been the first time they ever set foot in Mongolia. Normally the border was not crossed because they were afraid of their horses being stolen and because of the constant frictions between the Kirghiz and the Kalmuks.
When they were heading back towards Barnaul Demidov states they were all anxious to get back to civilisation. Despite the fact that Demidov's journey had a completely pragmatic purpose (hunting big game), his arguments about civilization, about the difference between civilized people and savages, and about the difference between different types of savages indicate that Demidov perceived the world under the influence of the discourse of Orientalism. The scale of civilization, formed in the era of the European Enlightenment, was used almost unchanged by the Russian writer to describe and understand the Asiatic population of the Russian Empire.
1. Blanton C. Travel Writing: The Self and the World. New York and London: Routledge, 1995.
2. Campbell M.B. The Witness and the Other World: Exotic European Travel Writing, 400-1600. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1988.
3. Mills S. Discourses of difference: An analysis of women's travel writing and colonialism. London: Routledge, 1991.
4. Colbert B. Travel Writing and Tourism in Britain and Ireland. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
5. Demidov E. After wild sheep in the Altai and Mongolia. London: Rowland Ward, 1900.
Статья поступила в редакцию 03.06.20
